/sci/ - Science & Math

if race isn't a social construction, how come other animals don't have races?

Gender : Social constructed as it includes the sexual roles of a culture
Sexe: Natural
Race:
a) A synonym of sub-species not adequate to humans (human race or homo sapiens sapiens)
b) In popular language, refers mostly to the ethnicity of a person or group of person or to the genetic patrimony of a person (refering to a genetic basin)

same species, same capabilities

>>3061891
Sativa, meet Indica

>>3061891

They do.

In animals they are called breeds or sub-species.

We are just to polite to refer to other humans this way.

>>3061891
Honeybees.
Apis mellifera ligustica: Italian honeybee
Apis mellifera scutellata: African honeybee
Apis mellifera carnica: Carnolian honeybee
Apis mellifera caucasica: Caucasian honeybee
Apis mellifera mellifera: German honeybee
Apis mellifera capensis: Cape honeybee

And a fuckton more, too.

>>3061922
>implying human races are subspecies
>implying breeds and subspecies are the same thing

My dog would die if I abandoned it on the streets, yet other dogs survive their entire lives as strays.

Is my dog a different race?

>>3061951
learn2natureVSnurture

I remember this troll. The thread yesterday was fun.

>>3061955
That's exactly the point I'm getting across. It could survive with the best of them if that's the life it grew up with.

Attempting to then model this in humans, a far more complex species, leads to even more complex interaction.

>not putting your race in the fridge

Race is a social construction. It is used to differentiate one person from another on the basis of their physical appearance/environment they have come from.

biologically talking of subspecies has little or no sense

species are defined by their sexual reproduction isolation in populations of individuals

>>3061977

but a subspecies might be isolated from another subspecie within a species

Gender : Socially constructed as it includes the sexual roles of a culture
Sexe: Natural (male or female)
Race:
a) A synonym of sub-species not adequate to humans (human race or homo sapiens sapiens)
b) In popular language, refers mostly to the ethnicity of a person or group of person or to the genetic patrimony of a person or a group of person (refering to a genetic basin)

race is a word
a word which is meant to denote some arbitrary variance of genetics which presumably implies mark of decent within a certain measure of assumed mutation.

>>3061867

>Implying that we don't all possess subtle genetic variations of the original African genome.

Africa was the source of modern humans.

Therefore using your train of thought, genetically speaking, all non-Africans are just a subspecies of Africans.

Fair enough.

>>3061991
Species is the singular of species. just sayin

>>3061946

>implying breeds and subspecies are the same thing

implying that i implied that

There is both a "socially constructed" definition of gender as it applies to society and a scientific definition of gender and sex.

That applies to race as well.

Also this is a troll thread from the looks of it. I am basing my hypothesis on the fact that OP just greentexted and left a questionable statement without any citations or reasons.

OP may be right, but I feel he's using it as an excuse for racial discrimination.

Race is a social construction to the extent that our classification and perception doesn't have a genetic basis.

If they're called "light skinned black people" rather than "mixed", that's a social construction.

>>3061867
You're right, race is but the melanin-level of a person.

Its nice that we can look past superficial differences...

how can humans not be different breeds/races?

a white man is clearly different from an asian one. not just skin tone but bone structure among other things. both humans, but different breed of humans. like how a Labrador and a poodle are both dogs, but different breeds. How can that be wrong?

>>3062184
Well, that and the crime statistics.

>>3062184
>You're right, race is but the melanin-level of a person.
that's what those retarded liberals want you to believe

>>3061867
Race is not a social construct. Black people are not inherently inferior.
Culture IS a social construct. Nigg‌ers ARE inherently inferior.

>>3062202

What entertains me with this debate is the overpowering sense that no matter where the discussion leads, the 'white race' will always somehow be seen to have 'superior' traits.

Regardless of people's ethnic origin there are always a mix of geniuses, heroes and downright fucking assholes.

As much as you find it hard to accept, no single 'race' has a monopoly or even a predisposition for stupidity. Arguing the meaning of a handful of IQ points (an arbitrary rating system, at best) or the impact of some deviation in external features appears evidence of a deep seated feeling of insecurity and inferiority.

>>3062298

Nothing was said in that post about superiority, just difference.

>>3062184

> mfw you think an albino black is a member of the white race

>>3062214
prove otherwise, cite peer reviewed sources

lets see it

>>3061905
A strain of a plant could be loosely compared to race, I guess.
Cannabis isnt the only plant with strains. Tomatoes, potatoes, roses, pretty much every plant in the world has several strains.

>>3062316
>Nothing was said in that post about superiority, just difference.

Yeah but you're either naive or lying if you don't admit that's where this line of "discussion" almost always leads...

>>3062354

If you suggest that this is the aim of your debate, I'd be interested to see which exactly differences you were pertaining to?

Surprise me, please.

WELL IT'S SOMETHING...

For the last time, race is not a social construct. People in areas like Europe and Africa evolved (though slightly) differently physically and mentally. Behaviors found in individuals of European or East Asian ancestry are different than those of negroids. We even have physical evidence that negroids have more fast twitch muscles, which explains their dominance in Olympic sprinting.

Certain groups of people changed with resistance to disease and other things to fit their own environment or advantage. Climate is a factor in our skin color, of course.

Race is not a social construct. It's a very scientific one born from thousands of years of human adaptation in certain isolated areas on earth.

Never forget, niggers have no Neanderthal DNA like every other race has. Niggers are truly subhuman.

Strongest men in the world are all basically white and have been for a long time. Whites actually are physically stronger than any other race.

Fastest men in the world have pretty much been all blacks. They are the fastest race physically in the world.

Scientific evidence and study into muscle has proven this.

Everyone got traits built up out of necessity. While darkies were running away from lions and cheetahs, white men needed the strength and intelligence to hunt down mammoths using tools and survive the harsh European winters.

>>3062506
>harsh European winters

If surviving winters made one race stronger and more intelligent, the Eskimos would be number one.

>>3062471
Are Indians/Mid-Easterners/Turks the same race as Europeans?

If you answer no, then race is a construct based on how you characterize what a "race" is.

>>3062506
>>3062506
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_weightlifting

Not true. East Asians have been dominating weightlifting for some time. China particularly.

Running requires little to no advanced facilities, techniques and equipment. Weightlifting does.

Hence why places that are able to pump out musclemen can. Linebackers/defensive lines are usually black and white mix, those guys are fucking trucklifters because they have advanced facilities.

Africa doesn't.

>>3062506
It's just instinct for niggers to run away

> stealing a meme, wording it incorrectly, not putting a twist on it and not putting your bras in the fridge

>>3062546
>implying advanced facilities matter more than perseverance and persistence.

American Anthropological Association statement on race:

http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

The burden of evidence is on you if you're going to make a claim against the accepted standard by anthropologists (the people who actually study this shit).

>Oh, and greentext + Costanza.jpg doesn't count as evidence

>>3062589
they conspiracy theorists of racism don't understand the parts of reality known as factual...

they argue from insecurities, not logical or provable standpoints.

>>3062506

So you are sayingthat competing for food with far-superior carnivorous predators, is somehow less likely to drive the development of intellect than rounding up relatively ill-equipped herbivores?

Undoubtedly, some biochemical and physiological traits are selected over others in different cultures. I find it increasingly difficult to believe that intelligence was somehow left by the wayside in the rush for the guy with bigger biceps, or that the development of successful physical traits need be mutually exclusive, less so once a stable food source could be established.

Society is a racial construct.

/thread

>>3062544
Reminds of a troll physics pic in which a cop holds a watermelon. Anyone got that one?

No difference at all.

Haters gonna hate.

>>3062673

There are pictures of really dumb looking white people and very regal looking blacks...

>>3062506
While the strongest people in certain competitions may be white I would definitely argue that on a whole black people are the most athletically inclined race. White people seem to settle near the bottom or the top while black people fill the upper middle to top. also, BRASH GENERALIZATIONS!!!!!

>>3062526
seriously. european winters aren't even harsh unless you're around the arctic circle.

Race in North America is a social construct. Hundreds of years of Genetic commingling has left virtually no real differences between the 'races' of North America.

Obviously, someone from Sudan is going to have the ~20% different genes than someone from Finland.